Tuesday, March 22, 2011

As scientists race to find a biological cause for chronic fatigue syndrome, long considered by many doctors to exist in patients' heads, the National Institutes of Health could shed new light on the debate at a major scientific workshop on the disorder.

Researchers at the University of Utah and elsewhere are working to create diagnostic tests, based partly on proteins or other markers that appear to show up in greater quantities in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. Diagnosing the disorder is difficult, in part because symptoms vary among patients.

Other scientists are trying to understand why other infections, such as mononucleosis, appear to prompt chronic fatigue syndrome in some patients. And in a program at New York's Columbia University, researchers are seeking to identify pathogens that may appear prominently in patients with the disorder. Researchers will be testing "for all those agents that we know affect vertebrates on this globe," says Mady Hornig, who heads the Columbia program.

Chronic fatigue syndrome affects between one million and four million Americans. They suffer from memory and concentration problems, debilitating pain and severe fatigue. Unable to identify a cause, doctors often dismissed these patients as complainers.

Currently, diagnosing chronic fatigue syndrome is largely a process of elimination. Molly J. Billings, 22 years old, first showed symptoms of the disorder in 2004, including headaches, muscle aches, fatigue and weakness. A year later, she could only get around by wheelchair and was bed-bound most of the time. She endured years of tests to rule out other medical explanations for her condition.

"It was horrible to go and not find anything," says Ms. Billings, who lives in Kendall, N.Y. "I want a test that will give me a finite result." Today, her symptoms have shown gradual improvement. She attends classes twice a week at a local community college and is able occasionally to go out with friends.

CFS, also known as ME for myalgic encephalomyelitis, got a boost of attention in 2009 when the journal Science published a study that found the retrovirus XMRV was present in most members of a group of chronic fatigue syndrome patients. The 2009 study divided scientists and led to intense debate about whether the XMRV link is a breakthrough or a result of lab contamination. The study launched a wave of new research.

Anthony Komaroff, a doctor at Harvard Medical School who treats chronic fatigue syndrome patients, was involved in a study that found viruses in the same family as XMRV in his patients. Meanwhile, Brigitte Huber, professor of pathology at Tufts University, was involved in separate work that failed to find XMRV. They are now collaborating on a project that received funding last year to study two viruses in patients with the syndrome.

View Full Image

Because symptoms of the syndrome tend to wax and wane, the researchers are investigating whether the viruses may be easier to detect when the symptoms are flaring. Dr. Komaroff is taking blood samples from patients when they are feeling relatively well and when their symptoms are pronounced. Dr. Huber will then analyze the blood to see if she can detect higher amounts of these viruses during times when people feel worse.

Jose G. Montoya, a researcher at Stanford University, is searching for possible infectious agents in chronic fatigue syndrome. "If we can find the infectious triggers, we can provide intervention," he says. Dr. Montoya's team enrolled 30 patients with elevated levels of antibodies against Epstein-Barr virus and HHV-6, a herpes virus, in a trial and treated them with valganciclovir, an anti-viral medicine. Dr. Montoya says patients on the drug showed improvement in cognition and fatigue. Researchers are now analyzing the patients' immune proteins to see if there are patterns that will help doctors figure out in advance who will and won't respond to therapy.

A number of efforts are underway to try to develop diagnostic tests. Researchers at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory reported recently that they found proteins in the spinal fluid of people with chronic fatigue syndrome that distinguished them from people with Lyme disease, which has some similar symptoms, and healthy controls. The next step is to narrow down the list of proteins to find "the best biomarkers for what is going wrong in the central nervous system," says Steven E. Schutzer of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey who helped lead the study.

Earlier

Nearly 25 years after the "Lyndonville outbreak" of chronic fatigue syndrome, a controversy is brewing among scientists over what causes the disease. A small-town doctor hopes his patients will help provide the answer. WSJ's Jason Bellini reports.

At the University of Utah, researchers are working on what they hope might ultimately lead to a test for chronic fatigue syndrome. Forty-eight patients with the disorder and healthy controls are involved in a trial in which they undergo a 30-minute exercise challenge. Even after moderate exercise, there were increases in gene expression markers in the blood for two days that allowed researchers to distinguish chronic fatigue syndrome patients from healthy controls.

More than 100 scientists, researchers and advocates are expected to gather at the NIH workshop in Bethesda, Md., attending sessions focused on such medical topics as infectious diseases, systems biology, immunology and neurology. By contrast, the last NIH scientific workshop, in 2003, had more emphasis on the psychological aspects of the disease, including stress, insomnia and depression.

Medical history has other examples of diseases that were not taken seriously but later turned out to have biological causes. Multiple sclerosis was once misdiagnosed as hysteria or chronic alcoholism. Today multiple sclerosis is suspected to be an auto-immune disorder. Stomach ulcers were thought to be caused by stress until two Australian scientists proved the bacteria Helicobacter pylori was the cause, work that won the Nobel Prize in 2005.

"The door has been opened by the retrovirus,'' says Mary Schweitzer, a former history professor who has chronic fatigue syndrome and was tapped to serve on the steering committee planning the NIH conference. "Now we want to bring in all the scientific research that is being done."

"Plenty of people are still dying of diseases which other people do not believe." (Dr. M.N.C. Dukes).CBT and GET for ME: "There is no nonsense so gross that society will not, at some time, make a doctrine of it and defend it with every weapon of communal stupidity."

Robertson Davies

THE NICEGUIDELINES BLOG VERSUS THE NICEGUIDELINES

These are NOT the NICEGuidelines. This is "The NICEGUIDELINES BLOG." What are the differences:

The NICE Guidelines are biased publications based on the GOBSART (Good Old Boys Sitting Around a Table) approach.

This Blog however is not only evidence based but also uses critical reading to judge papers and articles. I also use common sense and listen to others. And finally I read both psychiatric and medical evidence and opinions from around the world to come to a conclusion.

I’m not sponsored by anybody or paid by whatever company as seems to be the norm with many psycho people who publish the same article almost on a weekly base.

So if you value an opinion, formed as a result of participating in many ME activities, for example being bed bound for years, you have come to the right BLOG. All these activities have allowed me to form an opinion as a Doctor and as a Patient. And that is important as the voice of the latter is discarded by many including NICE.

If you don’t read this blog, you will miss out on “accredited” medical education. If you do read it, you may actually become a doctor who doesn’t stop thinking or forgets to ask critical questions. Many good things, including satisfied patients are at your command.

So, if you arrived here for the straightforward GOBSART approach, I will disappoint you. If you are interested in forming your own opinion about ME, and other interesting things, read on!

About Dr. Speedy.

I am a Family Physician or GP as it is called in Australia or the UK. I am also an ME patient unfortunately. Bedbound that is. So at the moment I’m in private practice so to speak. I’ve got only one patient, ME, or is it me?

I graduated as a doctor a long time ago, and I am the founder and editor of The NICEGUIDELINES BLOG, an internet based ME BLOG that is devoted to critical reading and cheering you or ME up.

I have the following conflict of interest: I would like to get better and see that the wasting of public money on CBT (talk therapy for a neurological disease, really helpful) and other silly therapies for ME stops, and will be used in better ways.

My goal has always been to help, and if possible, cure patients. With this disease you will soon find out that many psychiatrists and psychologists are only in it to make money and get their name in the spotlight. And what happens to and with the patients is irrelevant.

I stand to benefit both mentally, physically and also financially if this silliness would stop, and I would get my health back, and I can go back to work and have a normal life again. Please evaluate my postings with this in mind! And remember, there are also (lots of) psychiatrists and psychologists who haven’t switched their brain off.